|First submitted||November 12, 2017|
Bosnia and Herzegovina
This Country is:
Copyright H Brothers Inc, 2008–2023
Contact Us | Go To Top | View Mobile Site
Scanning my list, things that jump to mind that led to high/low rankings:
1. my experience with locals, including women I was involved with. This includes everything from how rude or friendly the average person was on the street to the quality of relationships I formed both friendly and romantic, long and short, and the ease with which I could form them. 2. food. 3. history. 4. architecture/civic beauty. 5. quality of museums. 6. infrastructure. 7. how far my dollars would stretch. 8. attractiveness of local women 9. experience with crime (though this seems to not be a significant factor, as I was assaulted and hospitalized in Ukraine but I think at worst I moved them down a single place in the rankings because of this). 10. weather 11. natural beauty & topography. 12. how often my car was stolen by corrupt local police 13... ambience? just... feelings
If you divide Europe in to West and East, as it often is and historically has been, all of these countries would be grouped in to Eastern Europe. In addition to being farther East geographically than other European countries minus Finland and Greece, they were also countries behind the so-called "Iron Curtain" and they share certain historical, economic, political and cultural similarities because of this. They are also different in many ways but that's missing the point. If Europe is Western Europe and Eastern Europe, this is Eastern Europe. If you want to further subdivide the continent then you would come up with different categorizations.
"Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia; all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere"
How long will it stay relevant to categorize them as Eastern only because of that short part of their history?
re: how long these countries will be categorized this way? For as long as they continue to share certain historical, economic, political, and cultural similarities, and as long as we continue using the same compass to determine where East and West are. In other words certainly today, and on in to the foreseeable future.
And as for how long. How long are certain countries going to be considered to have been part of the allies or axis... the WWII only lasted about 6 years... how long will they be categorized like that?? Well just because things have moved on, that doesnt mean that facts from the past will change. No matter how shortlived a certain fact was the case.
These countries were considered to be eastern europe.
But like kalbahamut said. This is how they were originally divided, so arguments that they were also part of something else or perhaps geogrpahically more east or west are invalid.
There are parts of north korea that are more south than certain parts of south korea. But that doesnt change the name
That makes as much sense as saying colombia and venezuala arent part of south america because they are (mostly) above the equator... Or that virginia stretches more west than west virginia so they should swap names.
And how does it differ from roman-ia and bulgar-ia etc
Hungary is geographically distant to other countries where Finno-Ugric languages are spoken. And Romania and Moldova are geographically distant from Romance languages. These nations are enclaves within a Balto-Slavic region.
Greek and Albanian are independent branches of Indo-European, so they could easily be included or excluded. The only issue appears to be Estonia v Finland - including the former and excluding the latter.
It was a good quiz, but it could be tweaked
It's entirely to the east of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Czechia.